Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Anusgamer suggests that he is an asshole, therefore suggests that you may be able to fix him, as Hammerer of Assholes.

Slightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend? I bought recently LotFP pdf, since I heard it's rather good, and it does show up to the promise, but I dunno what other versions offer.

LotFP is a great option. Labyrinth Lord or the original Moldvay/Cook Basic/Expert rules it's based on is also good.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Anusgamer suggests that he is an asshole, therefore suggests that you may be able to fix him, as Hammerer of Assholes.

The worthy are tempered, the weak merely battered.

QuoteSlightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend? I bought recently LotFP pdf, since I heard it's rather good, and it does show up to the promise, but I dunno what other versions offer.

I play Swords and Wizardry Complete with chunks of Majestic Wilderlands tacked on. I like all the different classes, I like ascending AC and BAB, and I like the single saving throw.

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;500713Why do you scorn people who play Pathfinder???  Are you saying they should have creeped over to the 4th edition of D&D instead of a role-playing system from another company that emulates 3.5 to a closer degree???

Good lord, I'm sorry that your missing my qualifier 'Seriously though, ...' meant you took offense at what I wrote, and that you got ganged up on and put on ignore lists. I'm always amused how quickly this happens on this site, and over what trifles. Seanchai had to piss me off and troll me for 2 years before I ever engaged the IL - and that was my first and last time. That was mightily hard earned! And now you put his hard work to shame by simply failing to get a bad joke on my part. Life really isn't fair.

So yes, 3.5. = first love, and PF = fake boobs. It's not that the latter sucks, but I don't think it's a worthy substitute for the real thing (allowing that tastes may differ).I'm unsure about a lot of rules stuff that came out for the PF system after the core book.

QuotePathfinder is awesome in the fact that everything that I bought for 3.0/3.5 is practically compatiable for it.  So my question back to you is how much 3/0/3.5 material do you actually own???

I'm a 3.5 completist, and my bad taste shirked from no supplement no matter how crappy. Only Weapons of Legacy - that was one step too far. I also got the entire Dungeon print run for 3.5, and every adventure path Paizo published for 3.5. (7 or 8 of them in total). Maybe if I ever run out of gaming material I might consider converting PF stuff to 3.5. I'm rather touchy on convertability, and would be as hesitant to port 3.0 material into my games as PF material. But that's just my personal take on it, don't let that take you offense again.

I'd suggest starting with S&W White Box, and adding things until the game is as complex as you want it to be.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Slightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend?

My favorite is the original rules and supplements, but those can be expensive to acquire, at this point.  Given that, Swords & Wizardry: Complete is my recommendation.

Quote from: Kaldric;500790I'd suggest starting with S&W White Box, and adding things until the game is as complex as you want it to be.

This is another good option, and probably the one I'd take, myself, if I were running S&W.  The reason I recommended S&W:Complete, instead is because it's usually closer to what people have in mind if they're not 100% sure what "white box OD&D" means.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Slightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend? I bought recently LotFP pdf, since I heard it's rather good, and it does show up to the promise, but I dunno what other versions offer.

I've got a soft spot for B/X D&D and thus Labyrinth Lord. It may be worth a try since Labyrinth Lord can be downloaded for free from the Goblinoid Games website.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Slightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend?

I'd suggest taking a look at a variety of things and mix'n'matching the good bits. To wit:

- "OD&D" properly means the very first edition, which - as P.J. has mentioned - expensive to get these days. Swords & Wizardry is a good stand-in and you should read the free pdf version to get an idea of what "minimalism" means in D&D - it gives you a yardstick by which to measure the complexity of whatever you end up with.

- Classic D&D - several printings of Basic, the whole BECMI series and the extremely similar Rules Cyclopedia. In other words, all the stuff that's largely concurrent with AD&D but doesn't have Advanced in the title. Personally, I think these are good mainly for cherry-picking ideasd from, especially Frank Mentzer's BECMI books. In my opinion, the most important thing about them is that they address the matter of high-level play (stronghold building, ruling a community, abstract handling of large-scale battles, questing for apotheosis), which AD&D and all subsequent editions have painfully and shamefully ignored. You should definitely check out these parts. Unfortunately, the Classic-based retroclones are all missing these parts (AFAIK), so you should really look for a [strike]torrent[/strike] copy on Ebay. On the same note, you might want to check out Melan's city-management rules if and when they come out in English, and the upcoming Adventurer, Conqueror, King, which claims to put a great deal of emphasis on this sort of stuff.

- AD&D 1st edition / OSRIC. Well, it's pretty much the edition that any old-school player knows well enough to talk about it, so I guess you might as well familiarise yourself with it. In terms of actual rules... I don't really know, anymore. There was a time when I was all "Ooh, this is the real deal!", but then I realised that everyone's using some houserules with it - if nothing else, they just ignore the Weapons vs Armour modifier table (for good reason, it's way too bulky), and don't do encumbrance and/or initiative by the rules as written. And if you're deviating that much, you might as well just tweak a bunch of other stuff and call your game your own homebrew.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500769Slightly on topic - what version of OD&D would you guys recommend? I bought recently LotFP pdf, since I heard it's rather good, and it does show up to the promise, but I dunno what other versions offer.

Swords & Wizardry Core is a good starting point. It has the simplicity of the original and uses some of the Greyhawk addition which makes more familiar to newer D&D players than the original. Varying weapon damage, etc.

You will find that the majority of older edition players are running AD&D classes/monsters/spells/items with B/X combat rules. Advanced Edition Companion by Goblinoid game represents that spirit the best.

I mention AEC because while OD&D started with the three booklets, it didn't become the D&D most people recognize until the addition of the Greyhawk Supplement. When you combine the subsequent supplements (Blackmoor, and Eldritch Wizardry, Strategic Review articles) you wind up with a game that covers what AD&D does but much more disorganized.

So when folks want to play OD&D they have to decide what part of it's evolution they want to use.

Swords & Wizardry Whitebox represents the original three booklets only
Swords & Wizardry Core, has selected elements from Greyhawk added
Swords & Wizardry Complete, has material from all three OD&D supplement added (rangers, illusionists, spells, items, etc).

Quote from: Rincewind1;500771Have mercy on me, I have no idea what's the difference and which is which >.>.

I think the former though - I do not mean actual OD&D (rules for that are free on the web, I think).

As Premier indicated earlier in this thread, there's a problem of terminology to begin with. "Actual OD&D" means "Actual, Original Dungeons & Dragons", that is, the little brown books of 1974 that are derived from Chainmail. Maybe you meant this, or maybe not. It's unclear from your posts what you intended.

I had posted something explaining the filiation between the different editions of the game... ha, here it is.

Hope this helps you identify what you want.

Thanks all - this is damn convoluted. Guess I best stick to LotFP for now, as it seems good anyway .

Quote from: Rincewind1;500878Thanks all - this is damn convoluted. Guess I best stick to LotFP for now, as it seems good anyway .

LotFP is basically a reboot of OD&D with a flavouring twist (what the author calls the "Weird" etc.), and of course, without the overt Chainmail filiation and the like (all retroclones do this in fact - they emulate a certain, specific way to play OD&D, rather than copying the game itself as it was presented in 1974 - though Spellcraft & Swordplay and one or two others integrate Chainmail into the whole to present a version of what might have been in play using OD&D in conjunction with Chainmail at the game table).

You should be good with it. I guess you'll like it.

I really need just a basic mechanic  to put my layers on it, so to speak ;p.

I'll probably buy myself S&W pdf next, if it's avaible. Shipping'd slay me.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500878Thanks all - this is damn convoluted. Guess I best stick to LotFP for now, as it seems good anyway .

Most of the clones mentioned so far have free versions you could download and look at to see what you like.  Labyrinth Lord, Dark Dungeons, Swords & Wizardry all have free pdfs.

Quote from: Benoist;500872As Premier indicated earlier in this thread, there's a problem of terminology to begin with. "Actual OD&D" means "Actual, Original Dungeons & Dragons", that is, the little brown books of 1974 that are derived from Chainmail. Maybe you meant this, or maybe not. It's unclear from your posts what you intended.

I had posted something explaining the filiation between the different editions of the game... ha, here it is.

Hope this helps you identify what you want.

Thank you both Benoist and estar for a quick rundown on the variations of D&D and the retroclones that are based on them.  This thread lit my Swords and Wizardry fire and looking at the latest (4th printing) of the Core rules, it turns out that the version that I was using (1st printing) is closer to White Box.  Not to muddy the waters, because the differences are really small, but I personally would go with White Box and build from there.

I think that Core and Complete would be a fine choice for anyone interested in Swords & Wizardry, but if you want to see the true toolkit nature of the game in action I would recommend taking a look at the simplicity of White Box and then these houserules to see what can be done with it.


-TGA